commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [dbcp] update to pool 2.4.3.
Date Sun, 29 Oct 2017 20:32:27 GMT
It's been a while since I looked at that, but from what I can tell, if the
method name needs to be tracked as well as the class name, then the
SecurityManager solution isn't practical at all. Pre Java 9 would need to
use a Throwable no matter what, while Java 9+ can use StackWalker.

On 29 October 2017 at 10:51, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 29, 2017 02:21, "Pascal Schumacher" <pascalschumacher@gmx.net>
> wrote:
>
> Am 29.10.2017 um 09:09 schrieb Mark Thomas:
>
> > On 29 October 2017 03:54:40 GMT+00:00, "Bruno P. Kinoshita" <
> > brunodepaulak@yahoo.com.br.INVALID> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Gary,
> >>
> >> Started the tests in Maven command line, found which tests failed.
> >> Executed the tests in Eclipse, found which class was related to the
> >> failure. Then did a diff between both tags.
> >>
> >> git diff POOL_2_4_2 POOL_2.4.3-RC1 --
> >> ./src/main/java/org/apache/commons/pool2/impl/DefaultPooledObject.java
> >>
> >> The short diff indicates that the failures started possibly due to the
> >> replacement of Exceptions in the DefaultPooledObject by a CallStack.
> >> Looks like the CallStack does not keep track of all the methods called
> >> (due to a security context manager from what I could tell?). Only
> >> classes.
> >>
> >> The following pull request updates pool to 2.4.3, and changes the unit
> >> tests to, instead of looking for method names in the log writer output,
> >> to look for the test class name.
> >>
> >>     https://github.com/apache/commons-dbcp/pull/8
> >>
> >>
> >> Feel free to review and merge if you agree it's a good solution.
> >>
> > I'm not sure it is a good solution. I need to look at what is going on in
> > more detail but if the method information has been lost then that will
> make
> > tracking down the root cause of a pool leak much, much harder.
> >
>
> I guess this was caused by:
>
> [POOL-320]: Use more efficient stack walking mechanisms for usage tracking
>
> https://github.com/apache/commons-pool/commit/3994baf0f3ce59
> b73bd36e869320275d757d1884
>
>
> Matt,
>
> Any thoughts on the missing method names?
>
> Gary
>



-- 
Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message